craig_shearman1

<p>I use a 50mm for 35mm and 75mm for medium format, both El-Nikkor. No problem making any size print I want with either.</p>

<p>If you have it mounted in the hot shoe of your camera, there is not need for anything -- the contacts in foot of the flash and in the hotshoe make all the connections. But you will soon learn that getting the flash off the camera great improves the quality of the light.<br /><br />The simplest way of triggering an off-camera flash is with a long PC cord. One end plugs into the flash, one end into the camera. If you camera doesn't have a PC connection, you can get adaptors that fit into the hot shoe.<br /><br />You can also use a radio trigger, which has a transmitter that plugs into the hot shoe and a receiver that connects to the flash. The most popular are PocketWizard but they start at about $100 for each unit. Radio Popper and Cyber Sync are also popular and cost less. There are some really cheap units available for as little as around $30, but you get what you pay for.<br /><br />There are also optical slaves where the built-in flash on the camera can trigger an external flash, and infrared triggers.</p>

<p>"Then there will likely be people who want a posed shot"<br /><br />Rather than shooting all the action on spec, this might be the way to do this and make money. Do only posed shots -- the owner with their horse, or whatever it is that horse people want -- and charge up front before you shoot it. Run it like school pictures -- an order form with whatever combination of prints they want, they pay you before you shoot and they get the prints in the mail in a couple of weeks.</p>

<p>I've never used a CamRanger but from the description it "creates an ad-hoc Wi-Fi network," which presumably means it is transmitting a radio signal (wifi is a specific type of low power radio signal). So would it be interfering with the PW? I'd try the PW's without with CamRanger and see what happens. Maybe also try them on different channels or frequencies.</p>

<p>The Ilford Delta film are similar to the T-grain technology of Kodak TMax films, so the Tmax developer designed for those films would be logical. But I've developed Delta/Tmax in D-76 and I've developed Tri-X/HP5 in Tmax. Personally I've stocked D-76 (most of the time) and Tmax (occasionally) but never both.</p>

<p>What you linked to is film. It's also completely out of focus, not just a soft look.<br /><br />You don't need anything special. Basically any camcorder will do. You can convert to B&W and schmutz up the image quality in editing.<br /><br />While if you go back far enough there were B&W consumer video cameras, I don't think there were ever B&W camcorders as such. By the point the video recorder was incorporated into the camera, everything was color.</p>

<p>1) You don't shoot an interview with two camera. You shoot with one, generally set up on a head and shoulders shot of the person being interviewed. Either before or after the interview you shoot some wide shots of the subject that can be used as cutaways during edits. If you want some of the answers in a wide shot, shoot a few that way but you don't need two cameras.<br> 2) A shotgun is Ok but you're much better off with a tieclip microphone on the person's tie, lapel, shirt, etc. Best sound pickup is always with the mic as close to the speaker as possible. In an interview, no need to hide it like in a movie.<br /><br />3) Low cost LED lights don't put off enough light to be of much use, especially with a diffuser. Probably the most popular lights are Lowel. You can get a Lowe Tota Light and umbrella and stand new for around $200, considerably less used. If you're scrimping, look at Smith Victor. You can get a reflector and stand that use a photoflood bulb, plus an umbrella, for probably $100. The Limo thing you've linked to is a toy. CFL bulbs of that size don't put off enough light, especially in an umbrella. And for $58 all I can say is you get what you pay for. <br /><br />You can do a good job with minimal equipment. I've shot video professionally and work every day with TV crews in my day job in PR. TV crews rarely work with more than one camera, often use just one light, and virtually always mic a sit-down interview with a tieclip mic. </p>

<p>The D7100 is fine for stills but for video I would recommend getting a video camera.<br /><br />Most of what people like about shooting video with a DSLR -- the "cinematic" look and all of that -- is overkill for documenting a seminar. There are lots of problems, such as those already noted here, that don't exist in even a mid-level video camera. Despite what you say about prosumer cameras, I've seen even $350 to $400 Canon camcorders that have microphone and earphone jacks.</p>

<p>I haven't done horses but I've done other sporting events. What you need is at least two photographers shooting (you said there are two arenas), preferably with a third to relieve you from time to time if there aren't sufficient breaks in the action. Then you need periodically hand off your cards to a separate crew editing, printing and selling. Division of labor is the way it's done. If you are going to let the customers choose the pictures, then you need to have multiple laptops set up for viewing, networked into the main laptop with your edited photos. This takes a lot of people and a lot of gear.<br /><br />If you're not prepared to set up properly for on-site printing, you could offer to have the photos available on SmugMug or the equivalent after the show. That takes off a huge amount of pressure and expense, but getting people to go look at the web site or buy pictures after the event is over can be difficult.<br /><br />Are you getting paid up front, or shooting this on spec and relying on print sales? Much easier to just get paid up front and be done with it.<br /><br /></p>

<p>I have mounted small lights to a backdrop stand with a clamp but nothing as big as that. Even if the crossbar would support it, wouldn't something that big show up in the picture mounted in that position? How about setting up a separate stand beyond the backdrop, weighted with sand bags as Ellis suggests, with the softbox mounted on it and popping over the top of the backdrop? You would have more stability and a little more flexibility in positioning the softbox.</p>

<p>Agility photos????</p>

<p>If you have that much time and are into landscapes, you really should contact the Maine Photographic Workshops in Rockport, Maine. They are one of the best U.S. photography schools and they do an extensive range of classes in everything from the basics to master classes, including a number on nature photography along the Maine coast. I did one several years ago and got some of the best landscape and nature pictures of my life. Their instructors are not only world class photographers but know the area intimately and can take you straight to places you would never come across on your own. The master classes are typically a week long -- Sunday afternoon through Saturday morning -- but you might be able to work out something for however many days you have available. If your wife is with you but doesn't want to be out in the woods taking pictures every day, Rockport and Camden have lots of good shopping, restaurants and tourist activities (whale watching, among others).</p>

<p>I've both bought and sold on eBay and for me "local pickup only" and "no returns" are big no-nos. As for no returns, it basically tells the buyer they are taking a total gamble and that if the item turns out to be junk they are just plain out of luck. I would never buy from someone who says no returns. As for local pickup, that's one that is usually used only for something so big, bulky and heavy that it's not practical to ship. For anything else, it raises several issues, including the safety of both the buyer and the seller. Do you really want a stranger coming to your home, where you have advertised that you have valuable camera equipment? As a buyer, would you want to go see a stranger who knows you're carrying a large amount of cash?</p>

<p>I have generally carried my cameras with lenses attached, partly so that they are always ready go to (I used to be a newspaper photographer) and partly according to what fits the bag. It really does come down to what bag you are using and what you are carrying.<br /><br />My main bag currently is a LowePro with wheels, about the size of a small airline carryon. My D7000 goes inside with 70-200 and battery grip attached. My D200 goes in a small compartment with a lenscap while my 24-70 and 12-24 each go in separate compartments. I would probably prefer to have the 24-70 mounted on the D200 but haven't gotten around to reconfiguring the bag to allow that. But at this point I shoot mostly with the D7000 and use the D200 as my backup, so I might still have to swap lenses once I start shooting anyhow.<br /><br />Back in film days, I used a Domke F2 shoulder bag. Carried an F2 and an FM, with a 28 on one and a 50 on the other just because that was what fit, with a 105 and 200 in other compartments. Unfortunately the bigger zooms today don't fit as compactly as that kit did, at least in the bags I have.</p>

<p>There's a ton of advice here but mine is to keep it simple. I've shot groups this large many times and it's no big deal. No need for special equipment. The biggest challenge is posing. You probably want the grandparents seated, then you have to work the rest in around them as tight as possible and in proportion to the picture (you don't want three lines 10 people wide with lots of empty space at the top and bottom). Use whatever kit lens you have. I would use a small ladder or even a chair to get a little elevation and shoot down slightly on the group to help make sure everybody can be seen. Use flash whether you are inside or out.<br /><br />Yes there are more complicated ways to do this and if I were doing this as a formal family portrait in the study I might go that way. But it sounds like you're just trying to pull off a nice group shot at a family event so, again, I would keep it simple.</p>

<p>If you hand pictures over to the bride and she puts them up on the web, you're not the one who has published them -- she is.<br /><br />Wedding photographers have a contractual relationship with the bride (or bride and groom, or parents, etc.) but not with the guests at a wedding.</p>

<p>James -- you can get any photo supplies you want with the click of your mouse. Go to <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com">www.bhphotovideo.com</a> or any other online camera store of your choice and buy real developer and real fixer. That would eliminate two huge variables right off the bat.<br /><br />But the reality, as you note yourself, is that this film is nearly four decades old. Not only is the film no longer made but I don't think the intended chemicals are either. (I think Ektachrome 160 was made for ME-4, the movie equivalent of E-4, which was replaced long ago by E-6). You are correct that some people have tried developing it as B&W with some success, but it's not a sure thing.<br /><br />I was a big fan of super 8 back in the day. I shot a couple of short documentaries in it, wrote about Super 8 for The independent (a film magazine) and was a judge in the Super 8 contest they used to run at Rutgers University. It's a shame that the format has basically been abandoned by Kodak. (They give it lip service, but at this point you can shoot Super 8 but you have to finish on video if you want color and sound.) Of course they have bigger problems.</p>

<p>I was in southern Spain a couple of years ago and just got back from Greece, including Athens and Santorini. The sun is roughly the same distance from any point on the globe, so it's not any brighter in Spain than it is in New York or London. There are just fewer clouds to break it up. Film speed isn't relevant -- exposure for ISO 400 in bright sun is still f/16 at 1/500. The problem isn't that the light is too bright but that direct sunlight in mid day is bad light. The answer is to avoid shooting in the bright glaring light of midday regardless of where you are. Light is almost always better in early morning or late in the day. If you are shooting in mid-day, try to shoot in places in the shade, again the same that you would do anywhere.</p> <p> </p>

<p>Haven't done this recently but my recollection is that there is a format specific to movie DVDs that play in a DVD player (as opposed to DVD discs used as file storage). If you tell your video editing software to output the final video as a DVD, it very likely defaults to the standard setting.<br /><br />The various formats are more for shooting/editing rather than a release format.</p>

<p>If they're within half a stop, I wouldn't worry. As Dan suggests, maybe the 50 is overexposing. If it's off a quarter stop (not enough to worry about) toward overexposure and the 24-70 is off by a quarter stop toward underexposure, that would account for the difference you're seeing.<br /><br />If you were shooting with a handheld incident meter and setting exposures based on that, having lenses that don't match could be a problem. But it sounds like you are metering through the camera. In that case, it really doesn't matter if they don't match since you're going to be setting your exposure by whichever one is on the camera at the moment. Again, half a stop is pretty close.<br /><br />I do note that you say you shoot a lot under low light and therefore half a stop can be important in that case. I'm a big fan of the 24-70, but if you're in light that low that's one of the cases where I would give up on the zoom and go to super-speed primes like a 50 1.4. Keep in mind that 2.0 was always the standard for a 50 before zooms became popular around, so 2.8 isn't really a low light lens.</p>

<p>If you look at the shadows in the pictures you can see that the light appears to be coming from off to the side and in some cases there is a strong backlight or rim light casting shadows in front of the dog. That means it is somewhere behind the dog. Picking up the texture of the fur is key. Otherwise the black of the fur can just blend into the background.</p>

<p>If you want to do this for fun, go ahead. But Quantum already sells rechargeable battery packs that are normal voltage (in addition to their high-voltage Turbos), and cords that can connect into the AA-contacts of a flash. If they don't make a cord that specifically fits your Metz, you could still do that half of the project yourself. New Quantum batteries are expensive, but you can find used and re-celled ones cheap.<br /><br />I wired up exactly what you're talking about several years ago with a cord and AA contacts from a rechargeable battery that had died (I forget the brand) and a C-battery holder from Radio Shack and used it with a Vivitar. Battery life was longer but I don't recall the recycling being any faster. No problems with overheating or anything like that. No reason it couldn't be done with D batteries for that matter.<br /><br />There was somebody about 20 years ago who sold a battery called the Underdog that was basically what you are describing but with rechargeable cells, and it fit neatly under a camera in the tripod socket. Some of the Quantums have a similar design but cost more. If you have the technical skill to make something like that and sell it for less than the big companies, you might have a profitable little sideline in your future.</p>